Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

8
  • I think @dROOz's answer has covered your question about "奪耳 - meant corruption)", and in addition, he also addressed "省(simplified)" and "省多". If you disagree, you should not have "accepted" but simply "uptick" the answer for his effort.
    – r13
    Commented Jul 7 at 16:05
  • @r13 ,就本问题核心的部分(「夺耳」在语境中��意思)而言,@dROOOze 1 回答了「夺耳」的意思,并耐心地2.结合上下文做出了对此的解释。我是对他的2.持不同观点,而他提出的1.可以说是极为贴切的、无可争议的。 在这个问题中,我认为**1.的重要性远远��于2.,这是从零到一的突破**,很大程度上启发了我。这是我在理性上(在提出对2.的不同见解之后,仍然选择)accepted 他的回答的原因。
    – Soriak
    Commented Jul 8 at 1:34
  • Thanks for the clarification. now I understand better. But it still seems odd, you as the OP, to place own pinions in the answering box though.
    – r13
    Commented Jul 8 at 2:50
  • @r13 ,我不是太能明白您的后一句话的意思,我试图从我的角度说明这件事情:我认为我给出的这篇 Answer,可以构成对这个问题的回答(如我上面所说的 2.,我提出了如何按照上下文理解「夺耳」。这是不可或缺的一部分,虽然没有 1. 重要),因此选择回答是合适的。从而,我认为以 Answer 的形式发表我的这个观点,比在 dROOOze 的回答中进行评论,或者 Edit Question 进行补充,都更适合。 另外,我不是明知故问(虽然在 Can I answer my own question? 里面,这也是合理的),如果您是这个意思的话(恕我冒昧揣测)。我的这个 Answer 中的观点的形成,得益于我对 dROOOze 的回答的思考,尤其是在其启发下阅读了《说文解字注》的「廿」词条,并非在提出问题之初便有这个想法(那时候我连「夺」代表「夺误」这件事都不知道)。
    – Soriak
    Commented Jul 8 at 3:11
  • 2
    感謝花功夫仔細批了我的答案!StackExchange 不太適合論壇式來回討論,所以我認爲用這答案的内容問個新問題(列如:段玉裁《說文解字注》中解的「卅」字如何分析?)較好。
    – dROOOze
    Commented Jul 8 at 6:10